The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-04-19
lTss'THE MAXWELL LAND GRANT.
A ong- Pending Suit Finally Settled by tn,
Supreme Court.

ong Pending Suit Finally Settled by the
Supreme Court.
WASHINGTON April 1S.-The Supreme Court
to-day delivered it's opinion in the famous Max
well land -grant case. which was brought before
it on appeal from the Circuit Court of the Dis
trict Of Columbia. The decree of the lower
court dismissed bill brought by the United
States against the Maxwell Land grant Com
pany. the Denver & Rio Grande Railway Com
pany, the Pueblo & Arkansas Valley Railway
Company and the Atchison g. Santa Fe com
pany. The bill was brought for the purpose of
setting aside patent granting to Charles
Beablen and Guadalupe Miranda tract de-
scribed in very extensive survey conveying
Lila, 764 acres in New Mexico and Colorado
The bill assaulted the grant mainly upon the
ground that the patent was secured upon false
representations of defendant. 1t conceded the
validity of the original grant by Mexico, but
charged conspiracy and fraud in the survey, by
which means the patent made to cover
265.OOO acres more than the original grant COM
pretended ''The question of fraud in the sur
vey.' the court says, (which is about all there
Is OF actual fraud in the title of defendants is
not deserving of much consideration We are
compelled to say that we do not see any salts
factory evidence Of an attempt to commit a
fraud, and still less of its contamination AS to
the principal officers Of the government who
were connected with that survey, to w.t. the
Commissioner of the General Land Office and
the Surveyor-general of the Territory of New
Mexico. there is not the slightest evidence that
they were governed by any fraudulent or i'm
proper motive in their acts in regard to this
survey. or that they displayed any leaning to-
ward the grantees In ascertanlng the true
boundaries of the grant Nor is there any seri-
GUS attack upon the subordinates Of those Of
fcers or any of the persons actually engaged in
making the survey, in regard to their
honesty OF purpose or interest in the result.
20 fob IN fho IL H. 49, - ~
in court of equity. it is proposed to set aside,
TO annul or to correct a written instrument
under seal for fraud or mistake in the execution
OF the instrument itself, the testimony which
this is done must be clear, unequivocai and con-
vncing, and that this can not be done upon a
bare preponderance Of evidence which leaves the
issue in doubt If the proposition as thus laid
down In the cases just cited is sound in regard
to thet rdinary contracts of private individuals,
how much more should it be observed where the
attempt is to annul the grants, the patents and
other solemn evidences of title emanating from
the government of the United States under it's
official seai In this class of cases the respect
auoyto a patent, the presumption that all the
preceding steps required by the law had been OBJ
served before its issue. the immense Importance
and necessity of stability OF titles dependent
upon these official instruments, demand that the
effort TO set them aside to annul them or TO cor
rect mistakes in them, should only be successful
when the allegations which this is attempted
are clearly stated and fully sustained by
which SO much property in this country
and so many rights are held, purporting to en-
anate from the authoritative action of the officers
OF the government and, in this case under
the seal and signature of the President of the
United States himself, shall be dependent upon
the hazard of successful resistance to every
within and caprice of any person who chooses to
attackth in a court of justice; but it should
be well understood that only that class of evil
dence which commands respect and that
amount of it which produces conviction, shall
make such attempt successful In re-
gard TO questions concerning the surveys, as
TO their conformity to the original Mexican
grant. and the frauds which are asserted to have
had some influence in the making of those sur
veys, SO far from their being established by that
satisfactory and conclusive evidence which we
have laid down as required. are Of opinion
that. fit were an open question, unaffected by
the respect due to the official and the sanction OF
the patent issued upon this survey-dependng
upon the bare preponderance of evidence-there
is an utter failure to establish mistakes or fraud.
For these reasons the decree of the Circuit
Court is affirmed.